Ten games into spring training, the Washington Nationals are 0-10.
Ugh.
It looks like the team, after back-to-back 100 loss seasons, are heading for a trifecta in 2010.
Or are they?
Adam Dunn said on Sunday that, really, spring training records matter only to people who look at box scores every morning.
Manager Jim Riggleman keeps trying to find the right words to explain his feelings. Yes, he’s not happy with the record but no, it doesn’t really bother him.
For Riggleman, the reality of the situation resides somewhere between “spring training records are meaningless” and “Oh crap, is my job on the line already?"
So the players don’t think their record means much, and neither does their manager. And management—while not happy—certainly is not placing too much stock in the team’s poor start.
But are they right? Does a team’s spring record have no bearing on their regular season hopes?
Last season, the Nationals broke camp with a record of 15-17, a .468 winning percentage.
If they had kept that up through the end of September, the Nationals would have had a record last year of 75-87.
Of course, they didn’t come close as they limped home with a dismal 59-103 record.
Here are the teams that played about the same in spring training and during the regular season in 2009 (along with their winning percentages):
Angels
Spring: .779
Regular Season: .599
Giants
Spring: .525
Regular Season: .543
Cubs
Spring: .528
Regular Season: .516
Mariners
Spring: .515
Regular Season: 525
White Sox
Spring: .458
Regular Season: .488
Yankees
Spring: .721
Regular Season: .636
Red Sox
Spring: .588
Regular Season: .586
Rays
Spring: .500
Regular Season: .519
Blue Jays
Spring: .483
Regular Season: .463
Astros
Spring: .422
Regular Season: .457
Orioles:
Spring: .382
Regular Season: .395
These teams played better in the spring than in the regular season:
Brewers
Spring: .734
Regular Season: .494
Rangers
Spring .614
Regular Season: .401
Royals
Spring: .625
Regular Season: .401
Athletics
Spring: .514
Regular Season: .463
Indians
Spring: .422
Regular Season: .401
Braves:
Spring: .636
Regular Season: .531
Cardinals
Spring: .645
Regular Season: .562
Twins
Spring: .645
Regular Season: .534
Mets
Spring: .561
Regular Season: .432
Pirates
Spring: .578
Regular Season: .385
Nationals
Spring: .468
Regular Season: .364
And these teams played better during the regular season than in the spring:
Rockies
Spring: .515
Regular Season: .568
Dodgers
Spring: .405
Regular Season: .586
Padres
Spring: .371
Regular Season: .463
Diamondbacks
Spring: .324
Regular Season: .432
Tigers
Spring: .484
Regular Season: .528
Phillies
Spring: .438
Regular Season: .574
Marlins
Spring: .419
Regular Season: .537
Reds
Spring: .419
Regular Season: .481
So 11 of the teams played about the same, 11 played better in the spring, and eight played better during the regular season.
Of the 11 teams that played equally well in both the spring and regular season, all but two—the Mariners and Orioles—opened camp without any significant personnel issues.
Four of the worst teams in baseball in 2009—the Nationals, Pirates, Indians, and Royals—played much better in the spring than during the regular season.
Perhaps these teams had rosters that were so thin they were forced to play their best players through much of the preseason and thus matched up well against the second and third string players from the other teams.
Half of the teams who played better during the regular season were contenders with nothing to prove.
The Dodgers and Phillies won their division the previous season while the Tigers finished second.
And though the Rockies finished 74-88 in 2008, they were just one season removed from their World Series appearance.
These teams were not trying to win; they were just trying to prepare for the upcoming season.
They had nothing to prove.
So where does all this leave the Nationals? In which group will they fall in 2010?
I think they will be part of the group that plays much better during the regular season.
There are relatively few questions facing the team in 2010.
Seven of the eight positions are set; only shortstop is a question and even that is a win-win situation. The Nationals will head north with either a proven veteran or a promising rookie playing there.
The bullpen is solidifying now that Eddie Guardado has been released, and if Scott Olsen remains healthy, the Nationals need to find just one more starter to complement Jason Marquis, John Lannan, Olsen, and Livan Hernandez.
No, Hernandez has not "officially" been named a starter, but there is little doubt he will.
Because of this new-found stability, the Nationals are playing many more non-roster types because veterans like Adam Dunn, Ivan Rodriguez, Josh Willingham, and Jason Marquis just don’t need a great deal of time to be ready for the regular season.
In that 7-3 loss to the Cardinals on Sunday, seven players who have no chance of making the 25-man roster saw playing time against the defending NL Central Champions.
The Nationals are going to be just fine. For the first time since coming to Washington, the team has a solid core of quality major league starters.
Spring training isn’t for them.
It is for Eric Brunlett, and Gil Mench, and Jesse English, and Jamie Burke.
By the end of the week, the regulars should be playing semi-regularly and the wins will come.
Really.
Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com
- Login to post comments